In your opinion.

https://www.playstation.com/en-au/explore/ps4/ps4-pro/

They advertise it as 4k on their website.

*******************



They mentioned 4k more than once.

I was gaming at a resolution similar to that, 20 years ago. :/

ROPS are usually tied to the memory controllers, starting with Vega however, they are now clients of the L2 caches which provides for big gains for deferred renderers. (Think: Frostbite.)
We don't know if this is the case with Scorpio yet, but considering Scorpio does adopt some more modern features, it's entirely possible.

Usually Rops are extremely bandwidth intensive so they would often end up being underutiliused, and considering how highly clocked Scorpio is relative to other consolees that exacerbates the problem. - By implementing the crossbar, it should mean that the Rops are being put to full use.

Essentially though it does mean that there is the potential that in a worst-case scenario bandwidth could be 218GB/s. In optimal conditions it should be able to approach it's theoretical maximums.
One thing to keep in mind as well though is that Scorpio does employ the use of Colour compression which does give it an upward 15%-25% bandwidth  increase in ideal scenario's over the base Xbox One/Playstation 4 consoles.

In short it might end up being a complete-non issue, we don't know for sure just yet.

Indeed. But upscaling is cheaper.

But... It's on PC and can also be played at 4k. ;)
It looks butt ugly though.

The PS1 paired up with a CRT TV can hide allot of the inadequacies of Final Fantasy 8's image quality.

Why stop at only 8k? Take it to the next level with Eyefinity/Surround vision and triple that resolution.

My Note 5 was on QHD when I first got it. Gorgeous display (I mean, it's Samsung), but it didn't outweigh the negatives. Sure, putting it to 1080p made it look a bit worse, but my battery life dramatically improved. Really no need to criticize the Switch's 720p display considering it's only 6.3 inches and has a battery life which is not bad or good.

OT: we really gotta stop this resolution jerkoff contest. If people want super duper legit ultra realistic 4k, then they can get a PC. Expecting native 4k on anything without a GTX 1070 is laughable

Buy a gaming pc, run at whatever resolution you want, with performance relative to how much you wanna spend.

Don't buy a console for 4K, it took them 2.5 generations just to manage 1080p at a stable framerare and occasionally locked 60fps. it'll be another generation and a half at least before consoles can do 4K properly, and by then 8K will be the next big PR bullshit and the cycle starts all over.

I have a 1440P display on my Note 5. I keep it at 1440P all the time. And that's at 5.7".
The Switch at 6.2" is only a fraction of the resolution with a larger screen. It's Perceived Pixels Per Inch is significantly higher.
I want more in 2017, not a last century resolution, that's me, that's what I want as a consumer. I won't be spoon fed anything less.

And there is every reason to criticise the Switch, heck there is a reason to criticise every platform. And we should. We are consumers.

PS4 pro I can do 4k "No you can't"
PS4 pro I can do 1080p on every game "No you can't do that either.
PS4 and Xone but we can do 1080p most of the time. Nope you are both not capable of doing that in graphically demanding games unless they are exclusive.
Xone X I can do everything in 4k. No but you will have the best resolution on consoles nonetheless.

GT4 could output 1080i on PS2. But yeah I don't think there were many games like these at the time.

Sony did mention 4k a lot, but didn't lie or hide how they were achieving it.

And thanks for the explanation on the X1X case. So let's wait and see how that will influence X1 games. I just now that I wasn't impressed by what was show on E3 stage, but perhaps on person it'll be much better.

GT4 wasn't rendering at that resolution though. It actually employed a few tricks to "fake" that output.

It likely had a 960x540 framebuffer, which was upscaled and interlaced... So that 540 lines was drawn one frame and another 540 lines drawn the next frame.

GT4 wasn't the only game on the PS2 that used a 1080i output either.

That's true. But to be fair. None of the console manufacturers have lied about how they are achieving their resolution targets.

They did embellish it a little to try and draw more sales in, which is a normal business practice, these are companies out to make cash afterall.

Well, I only played PS2 on CRT TV so I wouldn't even tell the difference, and I don't remember the other titles that used artifices for that. But sure I don't expect PS2 to have the power to really do 1080i even on GT.

Uhnnn, MS was really pushing real true 4K and prettier pixels and did lie a little, but not that it's unexpected or that if sony losing on sales and having only power to talk about wouldn't do as well. My beef with Phill is he pretending he is better than these tactics.

Never said don't criticize the Switch. However, a more premium screen on it wouldn't make sense. Making it glass would leave it prone to cracks, and a 1080p-4k screen would simply destroy the battery, something people complained about as well.

Either we get a good screen with acceptable battery life or a spectacular screen with horrendous battery life. have both and you get a higher price tag, something no one would want

The way i see it, is if resolution (especially now that we are talking about 720p and up) is the base of anyones argument as to why one platform is better than the other? Then that person is not worth arguing with.

I personally see the focus on resolution as a ridiculous waste of resources. But unfortunately, this is the current gens buzz word.... ts always something. Once we argued about sprites. Then it was polygons. And now its rez......

I still stand by this...... put someone in front of a 55" tv from around 10ft away, and lets honestly see if the difference between 1080p and 4k will jump out at them.